2015 ORS
40.360¹

Rule 609-1. Impeachment for bias or interest

(1) The credibility of a witness may be attacked by evidence that the witness engaged in conduct or made statements showing bias or interest. In examining a witness concerning a prior statement made by the witness, whether written or not, the statement need not be shown nor its contents disclosed to the witness at that time, but on request the statement shall be shown or disclosed to the opposing party.

(2) If a witness fully admits the facts claimed to show the bias or interest of the witness, additional evidence of that bias or interest shall not be admitted. If the witness denies or does not fully admit the facts claimed to show bias or interest, the party attacking the credibility of the witness may then offer evidence to prove those facts.

(3) Evidence to support or rehabilitate a witness whose credibility has been attacked by evidence of bias or interest shall be limited to evidence showing a lack of bias or interest. [1981 c.892 §54; 1999 c.100 §1]

(Rule 609-1)

Notes of Decisions

Where de­fense sought to examine police of­fi­cer concerning his knowledge of standard police depart­ment pro­ce­dures employed against of­fi­cers who use unnecessary force, failure to permit this testimony was reversible error where purpose of examina­tion was to test of­fi­cer for bias and corrup­tion. State v. Hubbard, 61 Or App 350, 657 P2d 707 (1983), aff'd 297 Or 789, 688 P2d 1311 (1984)

Condi­tion in plea agree­ment that witness testify truthfully was inadmissible because irrelevant to showing lack of bias or interest. State v. Eby, 296 Or 63, 673 P2d 522 (1983)

Where evidence of bias, that does not consist of con­duct or state­ments of witness, is not subject to founda­tion require­ments of this sec­tion, court erred by not allowing plaintiff to introduce evidence that major witness for defendants was employed by one of them. James v. General Motors of Canada, Ltd., 101 Or App 138, 790 P2d 8 (1990), Sup Ct review denied

Statute limits admissibility of evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts to attack credibility of witness, but such evidence may be introduced for other purposes. State v. Bolt, 108 Or App 746, 817 P2d 1322 (1991)

When defendant had basis for asserting that witness made deal with police, trial court erred by not allowing defendant to ask witness in offer of proof about arrest record. State v. Rodriguez, 115 Or App 281, 840 P2d 711 (1992)

Court may exclude relevant evidence of witness bias on grounds of undue prejudice only if court gives party opportunity to introduce other evidence from which bias may be inferred. State v. Tyon, 226 Or App 428, 204 P3d 106 (2009); State v. Haugen, 349 Or 174, 243 P3d 31 (2010)

"Public record" under this sec­tion includes Oregon Judicial Informa­tion Network (OJIN) case register because Oregon courts must keep case register and use OJIN record for this purpose. State v. Thomas, 257 Or App 770, 308 P3d 270 (2013)

Law Review Cita­tions

28 WLR 127 (1991)

Chapter 40

(Generally)

Notes of Decisions

General rule is that polygraph evidence is inadmissible in pro­ceed­ing governed by Oregon Evidence Code. State v. Brown, 297 Or 404, 687 P2d 751 (1984)

Party could introduce results of polygraph test taken by spouse for purpose of showing that response of party upon learning polygraph results was reasonable. Fromdahl and Fromdahl, 314 Or 496, 840 P2d 683 (1992)

Where state law completely precludes reliable, ma­te­ri­ally exculpatory evidence, exclusion of that evidence violates Due Process Clauses of United States Constitu­tion. State v. Cazares-Mendez, 233 Or App 310, 227 P3d 172 (2010), aff'd State v. Cazares-Mendez/Reyes-Sanchez, 350 Or 491, 256 P3d 104 (2011)

Oregon Evidence Code articulates min­i­mum standards of reliability that apply to many types of evidence for admissibility, including eyewitness identifica­tion evidence, and parties must employ code to address admissibility of eyewitness testimony. State v. Lawson/James, 352 Or 724, 291 P3d 673 (2012)

Law Review Cita­tions

59 OLR 43 (1980); 19 WLR 343 (1983)

Chapter 40

Evidence Code

Annota­tions are listed under the heading "Under former similar statute" if they predate the adop­tion of the Evidence Code, which went into effect January 1, 1982.

3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each
listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals
relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.